User talk:Kenneth Cooke

True Believer Syndrome
You've added this category to many articles recently, but are these attributions attributable to WP:RS? If this category has coinage outside the realm of M. Lamar Keene esoterica, the subject warrants substantive development at wikipedia. Absent this foundation, please explain the significance or noteworthiness of this category as well as how you've ascribed articles to it. Thanks. Professor marginalia (talk) 05:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to lay the damper down already. You haven't been at wikipedia long and it's perfectly understandable that you wouldn't yet be familiar with all of its byzantine policies and guidelines.  Unfortunately, the "rant" you've left on the article's talk page isn't really what the article talk pages are for.  The pages are for talking about the article's development, and definitely not for sharing opinions about the topic or how it relates to the culture at wikipedia.  I urge you to remove it yourself before another editor does.  See Not for opinions, Not a forum Talk page guidelines for a better explanation.  Since you're developing thoughts that relate to the community or culture at wikipedia, see WP:ESSAYS for what you might do instead.  Hope this helps.  Professor marginalia (talk) 01:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If my rant motivates people to develop this particular page, then it is about this particular page.--Kenneth Cooke (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think what you're saying is that you think the "true believer syndrome" should catch on beyond the more narrow scope outlined by its originator and that you'd like to see it applied to more topics than did its originator. If so, you need to start those fires somewhere else probably because wikipedia isn't where new ideas are initiated, it's just an encyclopedia.  But you're also hoping others who perhaps have sourced information of such as you envision being in actual practice already will step up and provide those sources-and that's a legit use of the article's talk page.  In the meantime, only those articles whose topics can be reliably sourced to tie to "true believer syndrome" can be included in the category.  Could you review all the cases where you've added the category to articles to make sure they are all mentioned by Keene?  Thanks.  The encyclopedia can't be a source of newly created claims.  Professor marginalia (talk) 01:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the short video. It had just been recommended on a mail list and I came here just after having watched it. Great minds and all that... Are you, too, interested in the topic? Work on related articles is always needed. --Hordaland (talk) 02:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD
Please see: Articles for deletion/Special creation. Borock (talk) 07:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)